| ...and if those advantages are state sponsored - they are pure social manipulation. I find it very interesting that people (both from the right and left) have this deep-seated desire to dictate their world view/morals/beliefs to other people as if 'other' people are stupid for not agreeing with them. Take just about any libertarian stance, since we are talking about Gay Marriage, then lets look at that:
Libertarian stance: Whatever two or more consenting adults wish do to with each other (have sex, be boyfriend/girlfriend/ marriage/live together/etc) does not infringe on the rights of other people to do as they (the other people) wish so it is simply not an issue for the state to reflect upon. The implications of this seem to escape most people: although the 'state' is legally obligated to treat everyone equally (in the eyes of the law or in regard to 'rights') people are free to define things for themselves: Churches are free to endorse homosexuality or be outright vocal against it, business owners are free to give special treatment to whatever type of people they desire (if they want to try to promote 'traditional marriage' over some 'homosexual marraige', they are free to give benefits to only Man/Woman unions, and businesses would also be free to act exactly opposite: promote 'gay' unions with regard to benefits and not give those benefits to heterosexual unions. It is in this way that society is allowed to truly reflect its beliefs and ideals. Its the same for bigotry or racism or some belief that blonde people are stupid: let people do as they wish with their own property and keep the state out of it. The businesses that refuse to hire gays will be at an economical disadvantage compared to businesses which have no such restriction. By stepping out of the picture, the state also stops encouraging an 'us vs them' mentality. Let people figure out for themselves what is in their best interests.
How wouldeveryone feel if it was federal law that you had to marry someone who you were not attracted to? If you were attracted to very skinny short blondes, but since that is 'discrimination' against fat, tall, brunettes - they state forces you (by passing laws) to marry someone who is repulsive to you. This is the EXACT same thing as the state forcing you to make hiring decisions based on things the state considers important, trying to force what constitutes alegal marriage, forcing you to provide group healthcare for employees...
people see this hypocracy in government, yet they still subscribe to the notion that it has to be this way....
michael
Take on the responsibility to be free |